Go on then, when did the SC say it’s own decision was “legally incorrect”? In those words.
-
-
Replying to @nearlylegal @DrJillStein
So you don't know. Here's a hint: November 2013. I will send you an invoice. I charge 'non-lawyer' rates. :)
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @AssangeLegal @DrJillStein
That does not surprise me. Go on then, where does the SC say it's own decision was wrong in law?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @nearlylegal @DrJillStein
Yes: In 2013 SC says the single point that decided Assange's case was wrong in law.Why I shd do your work for you?
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @AssangeLegal
In Bucnys the SC judgment repeatedly confirmed that Assange is good law.
@nearlylegal@DrJillStein3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Oh is that the one she is on about? I couldn’t believe that could be so.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Yes, only 'the one' where the Supreme Court says they got it wrong in Assange. Go back to law school.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @AssangeLegal
Oddly, i can't find anywhere in Bucnys where they say Assange wrong. Repeared confirmation that>
@nearlylegal@DrJillStein1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
(repeated)>per Assange, prosecutors were to judicial authorities under Framework Agreement...
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Roblev0
>and no suggestion Assange wrong on that.
@nearlylegal@DrJillStein2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
See Assange SC judgment & read Bucnys paras 36 & 39. 39: VCLT was wrong. 36: can't reopen regardless.
-
-
Para 45 and 46...
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.